At first glance I thought this was going to be an actual issue, like how it's unfair that in child custody cases for straight families, the mother almost always gets custody, even if she's not a good parent - or if one parent has a disability, they are much less likely to be granted custody just because of that disability, even if it doesn't threaten the child's wellbeing. But no. I guess Senator Graham cares less about real problems in the child care system, and cares more about the people who attack schools and other institutions for daring to teach their kids about history or science or different perspectives - you know, stuff from the real world. If a parent wants to teach their kids that creationism is real, well, they have that right, and nobody can force them into believing otherwise. But they don't have the right to make the rest of the world shut up and buy into it as well, or the right for an individual to stifle a community's education and curiosity and dialogue (as the lawsuits that cite this amendment most certainly would.) And it's RICH that members of the party pushing for a smaller government are the ones backing this. If that were true, the government wouldn't be getting involved at all. I'm against this amendment 100%.